A tale of two conferences: Whose justice?

By Prof. Jeffrey Haynes

Accra is hosting two major pan-African conferences in June. The first, the 4th African Regional Inter-Parliamentary Conference on Family Values and Sovereignty, takes place between 3-6 June. The conference, held under the auspices of parliament, is described ‘as a “historic” regional convening’, with Accra the first West African host of the event.

The second conference, between 17-19 June, identified by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as a ‘High-Level “Next Steps” Conference on Reparatory Justice’, marks a significant moment in the global movement to address the enduring legacy of enslavement and racial injustice.

Ghana’s president, John Dramani Mahama, leads the African Union’s efforts to secure reparatory justice for slavery and colonialism, focused in a 10-year project labelled a ‘Decade of Reparations’ (2026–2036), which aims to obtain both justice and compensation. This initiative follows a United Nations General Assembly declaration that the Transatlantic Slave Trade was the ‘gravest crime against humanity’. President Mahama established an Office for Global Reparations to focus on restitution and has pushed for a united continental and diaspora approach.

It is not unusual, of course, for Accra to host international conferences. What is remarkable are the differing objectives of the two conferences, although both are concerned with ‘justice’ – though for differing groups of people. On the one hand, the focus of the ‘Reparatory Justice’ conference is to take forward the recent landmark resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly under the leadership of President Mahama, the African Union Champion for Reparations, in order to get ‘justice’ for Africa in the light of the Transatlantic Slave Trade.

The ‘Family Values’ conference, on the other hand, draws on a Draft African Charter on Family, Sovereignty and Values (FSV), a 2023–2025 initiative driven by African parliamentarians. Its aim is ‘justice’ for those who regard Africa’s traditional ‘family values’ as being undermined by pernicious Western liberal actors pushing their brand of secularisation/modernisation. The proposed Charter seeks to codify ‘traditional family structures’, defined as marriage between a man and a woman, while emphasising cultural identity, parental authority, and national sovereignty over social policy. It is framed by its proponents as a response to perceived foreign influence, particularly regarding LGBTQ+ rights, abortion, and comprehensive sexuality education.

The ‘Family Values’ conference is organised by a coalition including the Inter-parliamentary Network on Family Values, Family Watch Africa, African Bar Association, and the Foundation for African Heritage, with links to international conservative actors such as Family Watch International. To roll back perceived Western influence in regard to ‘LGBTQ+ rights, abortion, and comprehensive sexuality education’, the organisers of the ‘Family Values’ condemn what they regard as the malicious effect of Western liberal actors while welcoming support from another Western group: Family Watch International, a USA-based group, identified by America’s Southern Poverty Law Center as a ‘hate group’.

Clearly, the issue of LGBTQ+ rights in Ghana, as well as in Africa more widely, is highly controversial. Africans generally have reservations about homosexuality, as indeed was the case in the West well within living memory. There is not necessarily much that is sinister about African reservations in this area, including in relation to recently aired transgender issues which may leave many totally mystified. This does not necessarily imply that Africans want discrimination against minorities, or even that the issue looms large in their daily struggle for existence. On the other hand, many do resent what they regard as Western insistence that LGBTQ+ rights is a defining struggle of our times. The United Nations is prominent among international organisations seeking to establish what it regards as internationally accepted values and norms. Over time, the United Nations has been most successful in its development work when it is prepared to show some understanding in this matter; not, of course, infringing human rights, but, for example, refraining from insisting on promoting LGBTQ+ matters in school textbooks (United Nations n/d).

Ghana’s ‘anti-gay’ bill is the latest in a surge of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation in Africa, encouraged by well-funded and organised American Christian Right groups, such as Family Watch International and World Congress of Families. The impact of the US Christian Right groups is noted in relation to similar legislation in other African countries, leading to severe consequences for LGBTQ+ individuals. In 2026, same-sex intimacy is illegal in 31 African countries and punishable by death in three: Mauritania, Nigeria and Uganda. In 2023, Kenya attempted and failed to pass a similar bill that would have criminalised homosexuality with the death penalty and banned the promotion of LGBTQ+ activity. Critics allege that Ghana’s parliamentarians now feel emboldened to adopt oppressive legislation with impunity, encouraged by Uganda’s ‘Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2023’. Critics describe Uganda’s law as one of the harshest anti-LGBTQ+ laws in the world. It prescribes the death penalty for ‘aggravated homosexuality’ and life imprisonment for same-sex relationships, causing a surge in violence, evictions, and arrests.

Both conferences have a shared theme: ‘justice’, albeit for different groups of people. The aim of the ‘Reparatory Justice’ conference is to seek financial and diplomatic justice for Africa in recognition of the ‘gravest crime against humanity’: the Transatlantic Slave Trade. The ‘Family Values’ conference, on the other hand, is in pursuit of justice for those who fear that Africa’s traditional ‘family values’ are being undermined by Western liberal pressure. It does not however imply justice for LGBTQ+ people. For them, justice means ensuring equal, fundamental human rights for all individuals regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression, free from discrimination, violence, and criminalisation. It entails legal equality, protection from hate crimes, access to healthcare and employment, and the dismantling of systemic discrimination.

The writer is an Emeritus Professor of Politics at London Metropolitan University, UK.